![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]>
Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
June 30, 2000, Decided
[***1279] [*1374] LOURIE, Circuit Judge.
Sandra Solomon appeals from the decision of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona granting Kimberly-Clark Corporation's motion for summary judgment that the claims of U.S. Patent 4,560,381 are invalid as indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112, P 2. See Solomon v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., No. CIV 96-2000 PHX RCB (D. Ariz. Sept. 2, 1999) ("Solomon II"). Because the district court erred in holding the claims invalid under that provision [**2] of the statute, we reverse.
A. The Claimed Invention
Sandra Southwell (now Sandra Solomon) is the named inventor on the '381 patent, [***1280] which is directed to disposable panties and panty liners for use during a woman's menstrual cycle. Independent claim 1, which is representative of the claims at issue, reads as follows:
1. A disposable woman's protective menstrual panty for holding a feminine napkin comprising:
a relatively thick layer of disposable absorbent material; and
a depression means in said relatively thick layer of disposable absorbent material, said depression means including a substantially thinner layer of disposable absorbent material operably [*1375] disposed longitudially [sic] in the crotch area of said panty and extending at least partially upward thereof in both front and rear areas, said depression means being dimensioned for receiving said feminine napkin therein for positioning same during use.
'381 patent, col. 17, l. 65 to col. 18, l. 9. Figures 1 and 2 of the '381 patent, which have been modified for clarity, depict the preferred embodiment of the claimed invention in the following manner:
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
216 F.3d 1372 *; 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 15317 **; 55 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1279 ***
SANDRA SOLOMON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KIMBERLY-CLARK CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.
Prior History: [**1] Appealed from: United States District Court for the District of Arizona. Chief Judge Robert C. Broomfield.
patent, inventor, invention, invalid, depression, district court, panty, thickness, prototype, clear and convincing evidence, deposition testimony, summary judgment, specification, subject matter, fail to prove, inventorship, disposable, infringe, argues, layer, skill, absorbent, asserting, region
Patent Law, Originality, Joint & Sole Inventorship, Civil Procedure, Discovery, Methods of Discovery, General Overview, Summary Judgment, Supporting Materials, Entitlement as Matter of Law, Genuine Disputes, Materiality of Facts, Appeals, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Appellate Review, Standards of Review, Motions for Summary Judgment, Claims & Specifications, Jurisdiction & Review, Infringement Actions, Claim Interpretation, Defenses, Patent Invalidity, Invention Theory, Specifications, Definiteness, Claims, Claim Language, Enablement Requirement, US Patent & Trademark Office Proceedings, Governments, Courts, Judicial Precedent, Reissue Proceedings, Broadening Reissues & Recapture, Description Requirement, Requirements, Joinder of Inventors, Parties, Joinder of Parties, Misjoinder, Statutory Bars, Experimental Use Exception, Elements